Re-dedicating Hayden Law Instead of Mandatory Spay/Neuter
As a mandatory spay/neuter bill moves through the California legislature, Assembly Member Anthony J. Portantino has introduced ACR 74.
ACR 74 is a proposed resolution that calls for public shelters to recognize and implement no kill solutions to reduce intake and euthanasia rates:
"Traditional sheltering practices allow the mass killing of sheltered animals......Every year animal shelters in California are killing thousands of healthy and treatable animals that could be placed in homes and thousands of feral cats that do not belong in animal shelters".
The resolution goes on to say, "Citizens have a right to have their government spend their tax dollars not on programs and services that kill animals but on those that save and enhance the lives of animals and protect animals from cruelty......Citizens have the right to full and complete disclosure about how animal shelters operate".
The resolution calls for "high-volume, low- and no-cost spay or neuter services", something not offered under the mandatory spay/neuter bill. Without that, the mandatory spay/neuter bill, S.B. 250, will impact the poor and is likely to result in more animals surrendered to shelters. Communities will lose valuable licensing fees as citizens avoid licensing in the hopes of not having to comply with the expensive mandate.
Many California communities do not have free or low cost spay/neuter services. Many counties or cities do not have these services readily available to the poor or others who may lack transportation or the ability to take an animal easily to the vet for this surgery.
Legislators might take a listen to ACR 74 for a more effective solution to high intake and euthanasia rates.
Aside from free or low cost spay/neuter services, the resolution calls for a network of agencies, organizations and volunteers to work with animal shelters to implement programs to promote fostering, adoption, socialization, education, training and rehabilitation, proper veterinary care, accurate temperament testing, and trap neuter return for feral cats. The idea is to make sure everything possible has been done to place the animal in a home.
The resolution is sort of an update of Hayden Law.
The Hayden Law consists of a number of amendments to various laws. These amendments are designed to reduce shelter euthanasia rates throughout the state, encourage owner redemption and adoptions and improve the treatment of animals. In passing this law, the state proposed to end the euthanasia of adoptable and treatable animals by 2010. Civil Code § 1834.4. CA Food & Agr. Code §17005, CA Penal Code §599d
To that end under the law shelters are generally required to hold dogs, cats, rabbits, guinea pigs, hamsters, pot-bellied pigs, birds, lizards, snakes, turtles, or tortoises for 6 business days before euthanizing them.
A smaller shelter that has made the animals available by appointment or one that has been open for redemption or adoption one evening or one weekend day, is only required to hold them for 4 business days. CA Food & Agr. Code §§ 31108, 31752, 31753.
The Hayden Law also mandates that instead of killing stray animals, public shelters or agencies must release them to any 501c(3) non-profit group that requests them. CA Food & Agr. Code §31752
Shelters must also take steps to verify whether a cat is actually feral or simply frightened. If a cat is determined by a standard protocol to be feral, it may be euthanized after 3 days unless there is a request from a 501c(3) non-profit group to take it. CA Food & Agr. Code §31752.5.
Under the Hayden Law shelters are required to assist owners in finding or placing lost animals by: (1) allowing people the ability to list the animals they have lost or found on "Lost and Found" lists maintained by the pound or shelter; (2) referring them to animals listed that may be the animals the owners or finders have lost or found; (3) providing people with the telephone numbers and addresses of other pounds and shelters in the same vicinity, (4) advising as to means of publishing and disseminating information regarding lost animals, and (5) providing the telephone numbers and addresses of volunteer groups that may be of assistance in locating lost animals. CA Food & Agr. Code §32001
Recordkeeping is also an important component of the Hayden Law. The records must include (a) the date the animal was taken up, medically treated, euthanized, or impounded; (b) the circumstances under which the animal was taken up, medically treated, euthanized, or impounded; (c) the names of the personnel who took up, medically treated, euthanized, or impounded the animal; (d) a description of any medical treatment provided to the animal and the name of the veterinarian of record, and (e) the final disposition of the animal, including the name of the person who euthanized the animal or the name and address of the adopting party. These records must be maintained for three years after the last date of the animal's impoundment. CA Food & Agr. Code §32003
Other provisions of the Hayden Law require humane care and treatment of animals held by shelters including necessary veterinary care.






ACR74
As the person who drafted ACR 74 and worked with Assembly Member Portantino in getting the bill across the desk, I must regretfully report Mr. Portantino has caved in to Animal Shelter Management and his local Humane Society and gutted all of the No Kill language from ACR 74. Mr. Portantino told me he wants something thats not controversial. The resolution will be amended to be an ode of love and appreciation to the work of animal shelters across the state. And even though shelter workers need all of our support, ACR 74 was supposed to a solution to the killing. One paragraph of the amended language blames pet owners for their failed responsibilities. As a person who represents pet owners, and their pets, through PetPAC, I had to disagree with the new language and withdraw our support. I am very interested, as is PetPAC and most every dog and cat club and breeder in introducing the No Kill shelter method as the approved method of saving hundreds of thousands of sheltered animals. I am really sorry, because I believed No Kill was a system we could all support to save animals in shelters.
There is also another method out of Calgary, Canada that has achieved similar results along with a 98% conforming rate on dog licensing.
You may want to contact Mr. Portantino at 916 319-2044 and ask why he dropped the original bill. I want to thank you for your support of the original ACR 74.
If you feel you would like to join with me to see if we can reintroduce another No Kill bill, please let me know.
Bill Hemby